Education Administration & Planning Committee Education Instruction & Programs Committee Harry Brooks, Committee Chair Debra Moody, Committee Vice-Chair Mark White, Subcommittee Chair John Forgety, Committee Chair Billy Spivey, Committee Vice-Chair Roger Kane, Subcommittee Chair Members: Kevin Brooks Kent Calfee Jim Coley John DeBerry Kevin Dunlap Craig Fitzhugh Eddie Smith Johnnie Turner Dawn White Rick Womick Members: Raumesh Akbari Harry Brooks Sheila Butt David Byrd Bill Dunn Sabi Kumar Ron Lollar Harold M. Love, Jr. Joe Pitts Joe Towns, Jr. Ryan Williams Tennessee House of Representatives House Education Committees Joint Meeting Thursday, December 10th, 2015 9:00 AM Legislative Plaza, Room 16 o Charge of the Committee o NAEP Results - Department of Education o Office of Research and Education Accountability o Advanced Placement and Industry Certification Exam Fee Pilot Programs: Conclusions and Policy Considerations o Credit Recovery Practices in Tennessee High Schools o Credit Recovery and End of Course Examinations These concepts will be discussed: o Current law regarding End-of-Course examinations o Determining which students should be placed in credit recovery. o Processes to ensure that students who enter credit recovery take applicable End-of-Course assessments [The committee will likely take a break during the proceedings and will reconvene at 1 PM] RICK WOMICK A, LEGISLATIVE ormcs: REPRESENTATIVE ?an Bf AR 629 WAR MEMORIAL BUILDING 341" LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT EB i NASHVIILE, TENNESSEE 37243-0134 game at Emmett FAX: (6 I5) 253-0322 EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION - SUB consumsmno HUMAN RESOURCES Nashv?le For Public Dissemination: The Speaker of the Tennessee House of Representatives, Representative Beth Harwell, House Education Administration and Planning Chairman Representative Harry Brooks, and House Education Instruction and Programs Chairman John Forgety have authorized a special study by members of the House Education Committee to hear testimony regarding presented evidence and alleged manipulation of End of Course Examinations, school performance scores, and district performance scores by Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools (MNPS). Tennessee Code Annotated 49?66001 requires that all end of course examinations be given to students in English LILIL Algebra 1,11, Geometry, US. History, Biology 1, Chemistry, and Physics, with the results being factored into the students final grade. All individuals who have information regarding the removal of students from these courses prior to end of course examinations by MNPS and who are willing to offer testimony to or testify before the Tennessee House of Representatives Education Study, will .be afforded the full protection and immunity afforded to them under TCA 8-50?116, known as the "Tennessee Whistle Blower Law." (See attached) I encourage all teachers, counselors, principals, and administrators to come forward and reveal any information as it pertains to the aforementioned allegations and evidence, The integrity of our school system, the education of our children, and the confidence of the public depends on revealing and correcting any improprieties that exist in our schools, districts, or state run testing system. Thank you. Respectfully, Rick Womiclt I State Representative 34th Legislative District RW:scs - Attachments rep.rick.woniick@capitol.tn. gov 8-50-116. Reporting violations of state agency, employee, or contractor. (1) It is the intent of the general aSSembly that state einployees shall be encouraged to report verbally or in writing to their supervisor, department head, or other appropriate authority or entity, evidence of activity by a state agency or state employee or state contractor constituting violations of state or federal law or regulations, fraud in the operations of government programs, misappropriation of state or federal resources, acts which endanger the health or safety of the public or employees, and mismanagement of programs, funds, or abuses of authority. (2) The general assembly thither finds and declares that public servants best serve the citizens when they can be candid and honest without reservation in conducting the public's business. (3) it is the further intent of the general assembly that state employees be ?ee of intimidation or harassment when reporting to public bodies about matters of public concern, including offering testimony to, or testifying before, appropriate legislative panels. (11) (1) No head of any state department, agency or institution, state employee exercising supervisory authority, other state employee or? state contractor shall recommend or act to discharge, demote, suspend, reassign, transfer, discipline, threaten or otherwise discriminate against .a state employee regarding the state employee'sevaluation, promotion, compensation, terms, conditibns, location or privileges of employment, nor may any state employee or state contractor retaliate against another state employee because the employee, or a person acting on behalf ofthc employee, reports or attempts to report, verbally or in writing: (A) The willful efforts of such person or agency or contractor to violate a state or federal law, rule or regulation which had or would have had a material and adverse effect upon program operations or program integrity, or the willful efforts to conceal'such aviolation; (B) Acts which constituted fraud against the state, the federal government, the public or any fellow employee; (C) The willful misappropriation ot?state or federal resources; (D) Acts which posed an unreasonable and specific danger to the health or safety of the public or employees; or . (E) Acts constituting gross mismanagement of a program, gross waste of state or federal funds, or gross abuse of authority; - a (2) The head of the state department, agency or institution or other state employee supervisory authority over the state employee may, however, take any appropriate 205 by the State of Tennessee and Matthew Bender Company, too, a monitor at the [.exisNeais Group. All rights reserved, Use of this product is subject to the restrictions and terms and conditions at the Matthew Bender Master Agreement. action or appropriate disciplinary action in relation to the reporting or attempted reporting of any information Which is believed in good faith by such department head or other state employee exercising supervisory authority to be fraudulent, dishonest or with willful disregard for the truth or falsity of the information. (3) No head of any state department, agency, or institution, state employee exercising supervisory authority, other, state employee or state contractor shall recommend or act to discharge, demote, suspend, reassign, transfer, discipline, threaten or otherwise retaliate or discriminate against a state employee regarding the state employee?s evaluation, promotion, compensation, terms, conditions, location, or privileges of employment because the employee refused to carry out a directive if the directive Constitutes a violation of state or federal law, rule or regulation, written policy or procedure which materially and adversely affects the operations or integrity'of a program or if the directive poses an tuu'easonable and speci?c danger to the health or safety of the employee, the employees or the public. Any state employee injured by a violation of subsection may maintain an action in circuit or Chancery court within one (1) year after the occurrence of the alleged violation of this section for actual damages, injunctive relief, or other remedies provided in this section against the person or agency or state contractor, or any of them, who committed the violation. An act or conduct constituting part of an alleged continuing pattern of violations of this section shall only be considered in calculating any damages if an action is brought within one (1) year of the occurrence of thread. - (I) A court, in rendering a judgment in an aetion brought pursuant to this section, may order injunctive relief, actual damages, reinstatement of the employee, the payment of back wages, full reinstatement of fringe bene?ts and seniority rights, costs, reasonable attorney?s fees or any combination thereof. (2) If an application fora permanent injunction is granted, the employee shall be awarded costs and reasonable attorney?s fees. 4, (3) If in an action for damages the court the employee was injured by a willful and malicious violation of this section, by a criminal violation based upon this section or by a violation based upon an effort to obtain personal gain, the court may award as damages up to three (3) times the amount of actual damage plus costs and reasonable attorney's fees against the individual or individuals found to be in violation of this section. No head of any state department, agency or institution or other state employee exercising supervisory authority nor any agency of the state of Tennessee shall be foundliable pursuant to this section if the head of any state department, agency or. institution or other state employee exercising supervisory authority was acting within'the scope of such employee's apparent lawful orders or authority and in good faith in such person?s reasonable interpretation of any rule or by the State of Tennessee and Matthew Bender Company. Inc-., a member of the Group. All rights reserved. Use of this product is subject to the restrictions and terms and conditions of the Matthew Bender Master Agreement. reguiation or was acting in good faith in such person?s direction to the employee to implement any law, regulation, policy or procedure related to the operation of any program of such agency which is the subject of the report or attempted report pursuant to this section. (1) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, any head of any state department, agency or institution or other state employee exercising authority shall be subject to the protections of 8-42-103 if it is determined such person was acting within the scope of such person's apparent lawful orders or authority and was not acting willfully, maliciously, criminally or for personal gain; and such person shail be further subject to the protection contained in the provisions for the board of claims under 9w8~112 relative to the payment of any judgments, costs and attorney?s fees where it is determined that such person was acting within the scope of such person's apparent lawful orders or authority and was not acting willfully, maliciously, criminally or for personal gain. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to diminish the rights, privileges or remedies of any employee under any othertederai or state law or regulation. Acts 2000, ch. 709, l. Section to Section References. This section to referred to in 84-409, 49-14-103. NOTES TO DECISIONS 1. Summary Judgment Proper. 1. Summary Judgment Proper, Trial court did not err in granting the Tennessee Department of Mental Health and Developlnenial and the Commissioner of the Department summary judgment because they presented evidence that the doctor?s position waslincluded in the reduction in force since he was the least qualified; the doctor presented no evidence of an actual causal connection between his reports and the elimination of his position. Maison v. Tenn. Dep?t of Mental Health a Developmental Disabilities, S.W.3cl w. 2014 Term. App. LEXIS 283 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 14, 2014), appeal denied, - w, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 795 (Tenn. Sept. 18, 2014). - Collateral References. What constitutes activity of private-sector employee protected under state whistlebiower protection statute covering employee?s ?report,? "disclosure," ?notification,? or the like of wrongdoing - Nature of activity reported. 36 203. . - - What constitutes activity of public or state employee protected under state whistiebIOWer protection statute covering employee's "report," "disclosure," "notification," or the like of wrongdoing m- Nature of activity reported. 37 137. 20 5 by the State of Tennessee and Matthew Bender dc Company. inc, ii member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. of this product is subject to the restrictions and terms and conditions urine Matthew Bender Master Agreement. 8-42?103. Defense counsel for state employees. When a civil action for damages is commenced in any Court by any person against any state employee as de?ned in this chapter for any acts or omissions of the state employee within the scope of the employee's employment, except for willful, malicious, or criminal acts or omissions or for acts or omissions done for personal gain, the attorney general and reporter has the discretionto provide representation to the employee. Such representation may he provided by: - . . . (1) The attorney general and reporter?s assistants; (2) Attorneys appointed by the attorney general and reporter; or (3) Payment of reasonable compensation of counsel approved by the attorney general and reporter. Attorney?s compensation, court costs, and other necessary incidental expenses in connection with the action shall he paid from the funds appropriated to the attorney general and reporter pursuant to this chapter. The method of providing representation is within the sole discretion of the attorney general and reporter. Notwithstanding any provision of the law to the contrary, the attorney general and reporter is specifically authorized to appoint attorneys and to determine their compensation to fulfill the purpose of this chapter. For the exclusive purpose of this section, ?state employee? also includes attorneys appointed by a court, or other agency authorized by law to make such appointments, to represent an indigent when a civil action for damages is commenced against Such attorney for any act ?or omission in the course of representing such indigent. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, such attorney shall not be considered a state employee for any other purpose including, but not limited to, 9?871 12 and 9?8607. For the exclusive purpose of this section, ?state employee? also includes any person who performs the functions of disciplinary counsel or other investigatory or prosecutorial functions pursuant to title._17, chapter 5 when a civil action for damages is commenced against such person for any act or omission in the course of performing the duties described in title 17, chapter 5. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, such person shall not be considered a state employee for any other purpose including, but not limited to, 9~8~112 and 9~8~307. For the exclusive purpose of this section, f?state employee? also includes any expert witness appearing and testifying on behalf of the department of health at any administrative hearing or other similar procceding held with respect to a disciplinary or other action against any person or entity required to be licensed, permitted, certi?edor authorized by any board, council, committee, or agency created pursuant to title 63 and title 68, when a civil action for damages is commenced against such expert witness for any act. or omission in the course of appearing and t5 Zill? by the State ot?Tennesscc and Matthew Boarder Cclupany. inc. a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights reserved. Use of this product is subject to the restrictions and terms and conditions of the Matthew Bender Master Agreement. testifying. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, such witness shall not be considered a state. employee for any other purpose inetuding, but not limited to, 9?8-1 12 and 9-8-307. Acts 1973, ch. 128, 3; T.C.A., 8?4203; Acts 1980, ch. 681, 1; 1983, ch. 67, 1, 3; 1984, ch. 972, 19; 1988, (311.768, 1; 1995, oh. 370, 2012, ch. 949, 1; 2013, 011.212, 1. Amendments. The 2012 amendment added to). The 2013 amendment added Effective Dates. Acts 2012, ch. 949, 2. May o, 2012. Acts 2013, ch. 212, 2. April 23, 2013. Cross-References. Counsel tor nationsl guardsmen, 58-1 -227. Defense of tone] education agencies and employees in asbestosurotated litigation, 09. Section to SectionReferences. This section is referred to in 4-51435, seems. Law Reviews. Selected Tennessee Legislation of 1983 (N. L. Rescner, J. A. Whitson, K. J. Miller), 50' Tenn. L. Rev. 785 (1983). . Attorney General Opinions. Defense of substitute judge designated by Supreme Court. DAG 97-004 (1124/97). Claims against general sessions judge for conduct white sitting by interchange, DAG 97-005 (1124/97). Defense of community service agencies'anct their boards, .oriosruosz (6/26/97). Cited: Williams v. State. 189 308, 2004 Tenn. App. LEXIS 43 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). by the State of and Matthew Bender Company, Inc, a member of tire LexisNexis Group. Art rights reserved. Use of this product is subject to the restrictions terms and conditions ot?tlac Matthew Bender Master Agreement. 9-8-112. Final judgments against state employees. (1) The board of claims is authorized to pay ?nal judgments for state employees, as de?ned in 8?42-101, for any damages, including interest thereon, which are awarded in a final judgment in a civil lawsuit against the in a court of competent jurisdiction where it is determined by the board that the incident on which such damages were awarded occurred when the employee was acting in good faith within the scope of such employee's of?cial duty and under apparent lawful authority or orders. (2) No ?nal judgment or interest thereon shall be paid where the employee?s conduct amounted to gross negligence or willful, intentional or malicious conduct. (3) Any portion of the judgment covered by liability insurance will not be paid. (4) Settlements or compromises of litigation reached out of court by mutual agreement between the parties may be disallowed by the board if the board determines that the terms of the proposed settlement have no relationship to the employee?s liability and the injtu'y or damage caused. - in order for any payment to be made as authorized herein, the employee must have exercised such employee's right to retain counsel in accordance with title 8, chapter 42, to defend such employee in the action ?led or must be represented by the attorney general and reporter, No payment shall be made unless the employee shall notify, in writing, the attorney general and reporter-of the existence of such action within ten (10) days after process is sewed personally on the employee. This requirement shall be met by an employee's timely ?ling of a request for the employment of counsel with the defense counsel commission, and shall not be required where process has been served on the attorney, general and reporter. Any ?nal judgment against an employee whose act or omission gave rise to the claim shall constitute a complete bar to any action, by reason of the same subject matter, against the state of Tennessee.? Likewise, any judgment, if permitted or awarded by the state, shall constitute a complete bar to any action, by reason of the. same subject matter, against a state employee as de?ned in 8?42?1 01. This section shall not be construed as a waiver of official or soVereign immunity where the injury arises from the act, or failure to act, of an employee where the act is the type of act for which the employee would be or heretofore has been personally immune from liability nor as a waiver of any other defense or jurisdictional bar available to the employee. Furthermore, this section shall not be construed under any circumstances as making the state an insurer of the aforementioned state employees nor as constituting a waiver of the sovereignirrnnunity of the state. t; 20l5 by the State of Tennessee and Matthew Bender dc inc, a member of the lexisNexls Group. All rights reserved. Use of this product is subject to the restrictions and terms and COtldiilG?S ol? the Matthew Bender Master Agreement. In order for payments to be made as authorized herein, an employee must submit a written request to the board, together with a certi?ed copy of the judgment against the employee, within ?fteen (15) days following the entity of the judgment. The board shall act on a request and shall give the employee written notice of its action. The board?s decision shall be judicially reviewable by the employee as a ?nal decision in a contested case pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, compiled in title 4, chapter 5, part 3. This section applies to final judgments rendered on or after July 1, 1979. This section shall apply to causes of action arising on or after January 1, 1985, only as set forth in subsection (11). I (1) The board of claims, upon determining that the of?cer or employee was acting within the scope of the of?cer's or employee's official duties, shall reimburse the affected of?cer or employee for actual damages and costs, including attorneys fees, awarded by judgment or settlement up to the limits found in against state of?cers and employees for any cause of action arising on or after January 1, l985, where the state ofticers' or employees' immunity set forth in 9-8-307(h) is not sustained. Notwithstanding the board of claims may, in its sole discretion, reduce the reimbursement provided in this subsection (11) if the board ?nds a circumstance to exist which makes such a reduction proper and just. Such a circumstance may include, but is not limited to, the failure of the officer or employee to fully' cooperate in the investigation and defense of the litigation. in cases where the judgment or settlement is in excess of the limits found in the board of claims may pay any of the amounts in excess of those limits whore such reimbursement is found to bear a reasonable relationship to the officer's or employee?s liability or the injury or damage caused. (2) For purposes of this subsection actions deemed to be within the scope of official duties include, but are not limited to, actions taken pursuant to the statutes, policies or procedures of the state of Tennessee, or when the of?cer or employee had reasonto believe that the of?cer or employee acted pursuant to the statutes, policies or procedures of the state. (3) Payments may be denied pursuant to this subsection if the of?cer or employee or the of?cer?s or employee's counsel have not made reasonable efforts to defend or if the of?cer's or employee's actions were grossly negligent, willful, malicious, criminal or done for personal gain. All other applicable provisions of this section shall apply to this subsection The board may promulgate, rules and regulations implementi up this subsection Acts 1982, ch. 7l7, 1; 1983, ch. 68, 1; T.C.A., 9?8420; Acts 1984, ch. 972, 19; 1985, ch. 105,? 13; 1935, ch. 322, 1, 2; 1995, ch. 260, .Compiler's Notes. This section maybe affected by 94-116, concerning entitlement?to funds, 205 by the State ol? Tennessee and Matthew Bender it: Company, Inc, a member of the LexisNexis Group. All rights resented. Use of this product is subject to the restrictions and terms and conditions of [he Matthew Bender Master Agreement. absent appropriation. Cross-References. Ciaims against the state. title 9. ch.'8, parts 3 and 4. Defense counsel for state employees. 842403. Employment of private counset, 8-42?104. Section to Section References. This section is referred to in 4451-135, 8-42-101, 8-42-103, 8-42?104. 9~8u1 08.E 58-2431 1. Cited: Adkins v. McCartt, 723 627, 1986 Tenn. App. LEXIS 3218 (Tenn. Ct App. 1986); Jain v. University of Tennessee, 670 F. Supp. 1388, 1987 US.- Dist. LEXIS 8708 (WI). Tenn. 1987). Collateral References. Payment of attorneys? services in defending action brought against o?lclais individually as within power or obligation of public body. 47 553. . $3 2015 try lite Slate ochnnessec and Matthew Bender Company. Inc.. member of the Loxichxis Group. All rights reserved. Use of this product is subject to the. restrictions and {arms and conditions orrne Matthew Bender Master-Agreement.